Social Lab No.
|Title of Pilot|
Short description (considering "design","problem/objective", "strategic consideration", "normative consideration")
Analysis & Assessment Tool
Dissemination & Awareness
No running pilot
|SL01||RRIish - Website on RRI||[general]: The ERC project EURO-EXPERT looks into the use of cultural expertise in legal decision making authorities. The specific ‘RRI’ website created within NewHoRRIzon will highlight the RRI aspects of EURO-EXPERT in an accessible, informative, and interactive way for a wider audience. |
[design]: The website will give a general introduction to RRI and specify its necessity in relation to EURO-EXPERT. It also comprises blogs by cultural experts and other stakeholders (with possibility of wider participation), podcasts or videos of talks at the department, excerpts of important texts related to the subject of RRI and EURO-EXPERT, a link to the database of cases collected and the tools developed by EURO-EXPERT, and public events of EURO-EXPERT.
[problem/objective]: The aim in the RRI website is to enter into a wider societal discussion about the project’s findings and the experiences of those affected.
[strategic considerations]: The RRI website aims to inform and interact with a wider audience about the role of cultural experts in the context of litigation.
[normative considerations]: With this website, a wider societal discussion should be initiated about the benefits and challenges of cultural expertise in legal settings and the wider questions these raise.
|WP2||in the midst of happening||x|
|SL01||Quadrologue||[general]: The Quadrologue is a structured and facilitated dialogue-game|
[design]: Four people (a researcher, a lay person, a student, a representative of research administration/funding organisation) discuss in a gamified set-up about science and technology and the bigger picture of research. In order to avoid the discussion drifting off the topic, the dialogue is structured and follows a certain format, that is provided by the information material and introduction video.
[problem definition]: The Quadrologue provides a format for low-threshold dialogue to discuss the impact of research and innovation on society. By bringing together people who would hardly come together to discuss research in other contexts, the Quadrologue aims to addressing the wider impact of research and opening up to society.
[strategic considerations]: This format is low threshold and does not create a barrier. Giving students the role of a facilitator empowers them and contributes to a discussion on eye level. In order to avoid that the discussion drifts off the topic, the dialogue is structured and follows a certain format. Facilitators will be trained in order to empower them. The Quadrologue lasts 45 minutes and therefore is short enough to fit in every day responsibilities. The Quadrologue can be organized almost everywhere with little financial and organisational effort. There will be a board game designed by the PA hosts to be shared with interested organisations.
[normative considerations]: The wider impact of research needs to be discussed. There should be discussion between researchers, research funding/administration, students and lay people in order to recognize and address the wider impact of research.
|WP2||in the midst of happening||x||x|
|SL02||EthicsRRI||Situational analysis of the importance of non-regulatory / non-conventional ethics and research integrity issues in European Public Research Organizations. As a part of the H2020 funded NewHorrizon project on responsible research and innovation we are investigating the question of the importance of non-regulatory / non-conventional ethics and research integrity issues in European Public Research Organizations to look beyond standard ethics regulatory issues and processes.||WP2||in the midst of happening||x||x||x|
|SL02||Quantum rebels||To organize a workshop on best practices in leadership for principal investigators within the EU Quantum Flagship program. Because this large EU program has just started, it is a good time to convene the key R&D people on this important RRI topic. Quantum tech field has for a long time been rather traditional in its culture towards leadership: masculine, competitive, control oriented, result driven, arrogant, “I” over “we”, etc and the field is very unbalanced in terms of gender. With a new generation of leaders in quantum technologies in Europe, there is a great opportunity to modernize this culture and avoid the risk of repeating it. To cross the psychological barriers and challenge established habits, the workshop should be easily accessible and not too time consuming, organized back-to-back with a meeting that is already planned. If successful, the workshop can be iterated in a wider part of the Q-community (Quantera, national programs and institutes, etc). Subsequent follow-up actions could also be envisaged possibly with the support of the Quantum CSA (e.g., gender plan, training, annual survey…).||WP2||in the midst of happening||x||x|
|SL02||Yggdrasil||Host a transdisciplinary expedition with scientific research projects; plan is to organize a 1-day activity in Munich in a park under a tree to go through an interaction that would help form guidelines for future transdisciplinary exchanges.||WP2||in the midst of happening||x||x|
|SL03||Research Kiosk: co-designing ways to interact between citizens and scientists||[general description] This Pilot Action seeks to design a format for direct interaction between scientists and citizens. [design] The design of the Pilot Action has changed profoundly in the period between WS1 and WS2, as a result of Pilot Action protagonists (still the same group of people, working closely on the issue) developed their ideas over the months. After analysing the results from the questionnaires to citizens interested in science-society communication (held during European Researchers’ Nights) the conclusion was that citizens are mostly interested in face-to-face communications. The question then was raised how to make that practically possible. This led to the design of a series of co-creation workshops which are held (1) / planned to be held (2) in 3 countries in total (Italy, Portugal and Spain), to enable the co-creation of tools for communication between citizens and scientists. The Pilot Action then will move on to develop selected tools as prototypes to enable citizens to engage with researchers, but the staging of the co-creation workshops are also an expression of the envisaged public engagement. |
[problem/objective] The objectives – enhancing the interaction between non-science-affiliated citizens and scientists in a practical manner – and the underlying problem definition (‘even if scientists wish to engage with citizens, it is difficult to organise in practice’) are still the same
[strategic considerations] During the Marie Curie Alumni Association General Assembly in February 2019, a poster on the Pilot Action was presented, including a call for interested scientists to join forces on the issue. The poster drew the attention of the MCAA board which led to discussions about a future cooperation of the MCAA communications working group on the Pilot Action. [Normative considerations] Still the same: it is informed by the ambition to lower the threshold for interaction between citizens and researchers, as a practical effort of implementing Public Engagement.
|WP2||in the midst of happening||x||x||x||x||x|
|SL03||RRI - Career Assessment Matrix (CAM): valuing RRI-related science||[General Description] Inspired by efforts such as the Open Science Career Assessment Matrix (OS-CAM), [design] the RRI-CAM Pilot Action of the MSCA Social Lab aimed to explore if OS-CAM can be adapted to incorporate responsible research and innovation (RRI) in researchers’ professional performance.The Pilot Action protagonists came to the conclusion, after exploring options to reformulate the advice to the EC on the possibility of Open Science- oriented career assessment in terms of RRI, that this did not offer the possibilities for an RRI-oriented matrix as originally envisaged. The question how then to reach the envisaged goal is a point of discussion in the group, which was carried further during the Workshop but remained largely unresolved. There is a design in the making by one member of the group, which entails a visual aid to convey an “individual research profile” for researchers to convey their capacities e.g. on their own webpage, which when imbued with sets of indicators could also serve as a framework for career assessment that acknowledges researchers’ efforts at community engagement and teaching next to research. Input for the practical design of such a framework was collected in a participatory workshop organised to co-produce research quality criteria during the MCAA General Assembly in February 2019.|
[problem/objective] The objective is still to change current assessment practices that overemphasize h-index and other bibliometrics in assessing the quality of a research (in hiring / funding decisions).
[strategic considerations] The Pilot Action protagonists are very active in building a network of change agents to explore and further the cause, which has a strong resonance with MSCA grantees and alumni. A plenary session on RRI in career assessment was organised at MCAA GA (with 6 speakers, among them the NH MSCA Social Lab manager and >120 participants). [normative considerations] The ultimate aim and underlying normative perspective have not changed: to rethink institutional assessment and reward structures in academia from a responsibility perspective, to include “community service” as an equally legitimate and rewarding cause for a researcher to spend time on.
|WP2||preparatory work started||x||x||x||x|
|SL03||RRI Training: training different target groups on the relevance of elements of RRI for proposal writing||[design] The original idea to develop an RRI training did not get shape after WS1, until a SL management team member developed one for the NCPs MSCA NCP Net4Mobility+- meeting in February 2019. From this also followed a report of recommendations for talking about RRI for the complete MSCA NCP network. During WS2 design criteria got further specified: the course on RRI should 1) go under a different name to engage with interests of specific target groups; 2) be differentiated per target group; 3) build on existing RRI training material. The group changed slightly in composition, and an interesting synergy with the RRI Manifesto developed, which led to a focus on developing a training for early career researchers (ECRs) on ‘transferable skills’ that is, on skills that researchers can use inside academia as well as outside, to enhance their career perspectives.[problem/objectives] With the broadening of the ideas on course design, the Pilot Action’s objectives now range from raising awareness on RRI to developing transferable skills. [strategic considerations] Plans in WS2 developed to disseminate the courses widely, in and beyond MSCA, via a ‘Training road show’, and to develop a Webinar for NCPs and MSCA ITN applicants in November/December (when the ITN call opens). [normative considerations] Changed from considering responsibility from a societal point of view, to make researcher aware of their role and moral duties in society, to responsibility of the funding scheme (MSCA) and academia as such towards the well-being of the researchers it supports and nurtures.||WP2||in the midst of happening||x||x|
|SL03||RRI Manifesto: discussing the importance of RRI and Open Science in transferable skills for Early Career Researchers||[design] The original plan to draw-up a Manifesto on RRI got elaborated into different shapes in the period between WS1 and WS2, including a short video clip with statements of early career researchers on the importance of RRI. During WS2 the design changed back, with the same group of protagonists, to a ‘written statement campaign’ with a graphical presentation to further RRI, which is to be accompanied by a Petition and/or App to create commitment. In addition, the scope broadened to translating the manifesto focus into a training for ECRs in view of their employability outside academia, implying a course on ‘transferable skills’. [problem/objective] The objective is to help integrate RRI into actual research practice by focussing on “human centred designs” of RRI: smart, measurable, achievable, relevant, time-bound. Furthermore, in view of the issue of transferable skills, the problem identified is that a large number of universities do not provide researchers with opportunities to develop other skills than those involved in research, amounting to a skills gap that may prevent a career change to industry, or that a limited amount of students have access to it, making early career researchers victims of academia’s selection process. The question is who has responsibility on the issue, universities or ECRs? [normative considerations] The group is very active in strategically aligning efforts at furthering RRI, e.g. as they are professionally engaged with a webinar series that include RRI / Open Science and related topics. In the aftermath of WS2, they set up a Skype meeting with relevant others to prepare a high profile session to discuss about the format and potential speakers for an ESOF 2020 session on RRI/OpenScience and transferable skills. This has resulted in a formal application for an ESOF session. [normative considerations] As is the case with Pilot Action 3, and in line with that, the normative consideration changed from considering responsibility from a societal point of view, to make researcher aware of their role and moral duties in society, to responsibility of the funding scheme (MSCA) and academia as such towards the well-being of the researchers it supports and nurtures.||WP2||preparatory work started||x||x||x|
|SL04||Disseminating RRI in the Research and Innovation Community of the Green Village Delft University of technology||[objectives] The main objective of the Initiative is to disseminate and share knowledge of the Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) principles within a highly innovative research Community, the Green Village at the University of Delft, in order to make RRI a principle guiding the way innovations can be developed, tested and demonstrated in their experimental real-life setting. [stratetic] The focus in this Initiative will be on societal embracement (engagement), one of the four cornerstones of the Green Village mission in relation to ethics, gender equality and open access and governance. [design] Two workshops on analyzing and implementing the RRI framework in an experimental innovative technical research community. Workshop II itntroduces RRI principles to the Green Village and elaborates project-specific RRI approaches, Workshop II evaluates the implementation of RRI since Workshop I. Guidelines for a practical use of the RRI principles within small extremely innovative scientific communities with multi stakeholders interests will be set up.[normative] Qualtiy Standards for innovation projects: the reflection of the projects internally and with external experts during the workshops and the assessment and development of these high innovative projects will provide importnant insights and have a guiding function for other projects at Green Village.||WP2||in the midst of happening||x||x||x|
|SL04||co-creation process in natural history museum||[objective] The Natural History Museum in Vienna as one of the largest non-university research institutions in Austria creates a social lab. The museum aims at getting more inclusive and diverse and will follow an RRI approach in future initiatives. [strategic] This multi-stakeholder social lab will strengthen RRI within the institution at a strategic level, create new alliances between science and society and will also intensify internal communication and awareness raising processes on the topic within the museum. [design] A series of 3 workshops is conducted within this social lab. WS 1 addresses stakeholders and optional future collaboration partners, WS 2 works with staff of the museum, WS 3 brings the two groups together and starts a co-creation process. [normative] building up new collaborations and communication formats to the museum, considering the RRI principles.||WP2||in the midst of happening||x||x|
|SL04||Revision of Open Access Charta||[objective] The group decided to revise the European Charter for Access to Research Infrastructures - Principles and Guidelines for Access and Related Services (EC, 2016) according to RRI principles. [strategic] To integrate RRI principles as they are not represented in there yet, and the document has a guiding function for Research Infrastructures [design] To do so, a small team of 5 people works together, the host is from a funding agency. They are analyzing the Charta and revise it with an internal iterative approach, they develop reports and presentations on their results. [normative] The main aim is to integrate RRI in the open access Charta.||WP2||in the midst of happening||x|
|SL05||Involvement of HSS in grant acting||not available - topic got abandonned||WP3||not yet started||x|
|SL05||Training on RRI||Responsibility in research and innovation (R&I) is an essential requirement driving the European R&I agenda since 2010. Either through the concept of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI), open science initiative, or increased socio-ethical reflection, the aim of increased involvement of stakeholders affected by R&I processes is one of the driving forces behind this unmet need. Such involvement of diverse groups with their particular interests incorporates substantial challenges; mainly: How can different societal groups be included in sustainability research and innovation?
How can researchers, innovators and policy-makers collaborate effectively? What collaboration tools are available
How can resistance to socio-technological innovations for sustainability be eased?
The pilot action explores the opportunities that the concept of responsibility in R&I offers to deliver impactful and inclusive solutions for innovation, sustainability, circular economy, etc. through a meaningful interaction. We will explore the challenges of open science and the value trade-offs that researchers, innovators, and policy-makers face when engaging in responsible R&I endeavours. The aim is to investigate, facilitate, and enhance effective transdisciplinary trainings and discussions of groups with a broad diversity of stakeholders. These include BSc, MSc, PhD students, academic and non-academic researchers, innovators, and businesses (SME/MNE). Our team will collect anonymized data that will inform the advancement of further research in cross-disciplinary R&I discussions and the effectiveness of various training approaches in diverse discourses. The output of our work will not only increase the awareness of the multitude of discursive methods in cross-disciplinary R&I collaborations but will also collect valuable insights for future research relevant to the collaboration between private and public actors for responsible R&I.
|WP3||preparatory work started||x|
|SL05||Involvement of CSOs into calls||The process of research and innovation (R&I) involves not only technologies and systems but actively engage with societies by interacting and affecting them. The normative requirement of responsibility in R&I, since its explicit introduction in 2010 to European framework programmes (H2020, Horizon Europe), aims at designing an inclusive and sustainable R&I process that involves all the affected societal actors in a cooperative and transparent manner. A plenitude of successful responsible R&I-related initiatives have since then been since developed, in collaboration with an ever growing number of societal actors and stakeholders. One of the lessons learnt from these experiences is that, despite the active participation of civil society organizations (CSOs)/non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in R&I collaborations, their invitation to the proposal-drafting process of R&I projects is not always successful. The objectives of our investigation are twofold: a) to identify and reflect on the causes of the barriers and hurdles of the increased involvement of CSOs/NGOs in the initiation of project proposal-writing endeavours, and b) informed by these reasons, to design a prototype of proposal writing process that would be successful in inviting CSOs/NGOs into collaborative projects since their conception. These objectives are expected to lead to greater societal cohesion and increased efficiency and overall societal benefits resulting from challenging R&I developments.||WP3||preparatory work started||x|
|SL05||Criteria Settings (+ SDGs)||not available - topic got abandonned||WP3||not yet started||x|
|SL06||Integrating RRI in TACR praxis||WP3||x||x|
|SL06||Integrating RRI into potential start ups and SMEs funders||WP3||x|
|SL06||Integrating RRI into talent management in SME (circular economy)||WP3||x|
|SL07||Learning from patient centered hospital concept||WP4||x|
|SL07||Enriching funding mechanisms||This pilot aims to identify and share good practices of responsible funding. For instance, a stronger involvement of representatives from different stakeholder groups and from the general population within research funding mechanisms might help widening the impact of research beyond the group of persons concerned by a particular disease.|
- Identifying good practices of how research funding agencies foster research impact for patients and society, both in the evaluation of proposals and the assessment of ongoing projects.
- An interview guide and a list of potential interview partners from funding agencies have been developed and will be used to carry out about 10 interviews.
- The output will be a report regarding good practice approaches and lessons learned for other funding agencies as well as recommendations for policy makers.
|WP4||in the midst of happening||x|
|SL07||Patient involvement in clinical service design||The aim of this pilot action is to facilitate mutual learning within two very different contexts by applying elements of the innovative model of patient/citizen involvement in service design at Karolinska University Hospital in Stockholm, Sweden to Agia Sophia Children's Hospital in Athens, Greece.|
- Exploring pathways and actions for involving patients in the design of hospitals’ procedures and decision-making that directly affect them.
- Facilitating mutual learning within two very different contexts by applying elements of the model of patient/citizen involvement in service design at Karolinska University Hospital in Sweden to the Childrens Hospital Athens.
- A visit to Stockholm by Greek representatives has taken place and a return visit to Athens is being planned.
- The output will be a report on the lessons learnt through these exchanges.
|WP4||in the midst of happening||x|
|SL07||Good practices of co-creation||Within this pilot action, characteristics of successful initiatives and instruments for engaging patients and citizens in agenda setting, research and innovation are identified. The H2020 funded MULTI-ACT project is represented through two SL participants and the two projects have entered a mutually beneficial partnership.|
- Identifying good practices of enabling co-creation in health. The pilot is done in collaboration with the MULTI-ACT and other relevant projects. Through a small number of case studies we will explore what can be learnt from them for mainstreaming co-creation in health.
- Relevant initiatives (e.g. living labs, science shops) have been identified and are currently being interviewed.
- The output will be policy recommendations and a validation of the MULTI-ACT framework.
|WP4||in the midst of happening||x|
|SL08||StepUP||What is the action: Developing a concept for a transnational R&I call with focus on stakeholder engagement in a European network of funders; 3 phases: 1) preparation 2) event 3) follow-up and writing concept paper; Envisaged output: A concept paper for a funding activity and a general paper/recommendation for European networks in general to support stakeholder engagemetn in research; Envisaged outcome: Setting the base among an international network of funders/ common ground for a future funding activity; knowledge sharing; raising awareness.||WP4||in the midst of happening||x||x||x||x|
|SL08||STEM||The transdisciplinary research process connects scientific knowledge production and societal problem handling (Pohl et al. 2017). This approach requires a co-production of knowledge between researchers, practitioners and lay people, and is closely aligned to Responsible Research and Innovation EC keys: public engagement and science education. In general, to ensure that project efforts truly align with the aspirations and interests of all the stakeholders, and genuinely serve the above mentioned RRI keys, a dynamic well-functioning involvement of relevant stakeholders is imperative. Depending on the case, the stakeholders will be requested to focus on actual research questions, participate on relevant activities and develop innovative solutions, thus generating ownership to the question in hand. This most likely promotes the take up of the resulting solutions amongst practitioners and may also narrow the gap between scientific community and lay people, in particular, in the case of controversial research questions. The objective of this pilot action is to assess, test and share experiences of existing stakeholder platforms, using two projects in starting phase as cases (gene technology in aquaculture, digital innovation in agriculture):||WP4||preparatory work started||x|
|SL08||Confession Time||Multi-Actor Approaches (MAA) are core of many H2020 funded projects as driver of bottom-up and grounded innovative solutions . With the direct involvement in the project activities of different end users and multipliers, MAA projects “focus on real problems or opportunities that farmers, foresters or others who need a solution are facing. It also means that partners with complementary types of knowledge – scientific, practical and other – must join forces in the project activities from beginning to end” (EIP-Agri, 2017).|
The co-construction process of MAAs project is complicated, as it requires the creation of innovation networks, where individuals meet to bring forward and co-create knowledge on selected topics (Martinez de Arano et al., 2018). Some of the crucial objective to be achieved are:
• Guarantee information exchanges across the network;
• Foster a co-learning process among the network members;
• Maintain internal trust and cooperation across members.
• Managing stakeholder expectations
The objective of this pilot action is to develop an interactive module to allow running projects sharing experiences on implemented MAAs: “the coordinators´ café”
|WP4||in the midst of happening||x||x|
|SL08||BIAS^2||Legislative changes have made discrimination illegal in most Countries, but we are facing a second-generation of bias (implicit bias) which refers to subtle forms of inherent and unconscious bias . Past studies indicate that people’s behavior is shaped by implicit or unintended biases, stemming from repeated exposure to pervasive cultural stereotypes . Biases based on race, nationality, religion, class, age, sex, and sexual orientation (to cite a few examples) may unintentionally guide our thoughts and actions .|
Ending this second-generation bias is hard because people alike do not realize discrimination is taking place, or deny that it is occurring . That is, even when people are truthful, self-reports can only reflect what they believe about their orientations, whereas implicit measures bypass this limitation. Implicit biases are thought to be automatic not only in the sense that they are fast-acting, but also because they can operate without intention (i.e., are involuntary and uncontrollable), and conscious awareness . The confidence that our judgments are objective is not a guarantee that judgments are actually objective, because so many of our biases are unconscious, and this simple statement has - alone - many implications for a scientist . This can obviously strongly affect how science is practiced and guided in the lab and at academic and other research and innovation institutions.The pilot action BIAS^2 aims at raising awareness about the existence and implications of bias in our working group, lab, office etc. Colleagues and friends will be invited to take conscious awareness of their own biases, without proposing solutions or “cures”; indeed, a responsible scientist will recognize the potential for one or more bias to interfere with his/her work, with his objectivity to tackle scientific questions and build knowledge.
|WP4||in the midst of happening||x|
|SL09||RRI in Living Labs||[objective] The goal of this pilot is to make RRI progress in science and society.|
[normative consideration] The group wants to foster learning between living labs and to work with practice examples to foster mutual learning processes.
[strategic consideration] The pilot aims at bridging the gap between theory and practice. Therefore they are surveying living labs on the topic Energy in cities on the RRI approach.
|WP4||in the midst of happening||x||x|
|SL09||Renewable Energy Knowhere||[objective] This pilot action seeks to create a one-stop-shop knowledge base for sustainable energy use for multiple stakeholders.|
[strategic] Therefore a common spreadsheet covering multiple renewable energy topics has been set up covering the working countries from all SL participants. A thereby generated initial knowledge base is then transformed into a webpage.
[normative] This webpage aims at beeing openly accessible, extentable and hence at sustaining beyond the project's lifetime.
|WP4||in the midst of happening||x|
|SL09||NCP Training (ENERGY)||[objective] This pilot organises an RRI training for the ENERGY NCPs. |
[strategic] The pilot's goal is that all European NCPs have a common understanding of RRI in their field and as a consequence [normative] can further give trainings on how to implement RRI in the proposal writing and in projects. To reach this goal, one training workshop is planned for ENERGY NCPs taking place on October 10th and 11th in Vienna.
|WP4||preparatory work started||x||x|
|SL10||Workshop on RRI and Stakeholder engagement (Transport)||Within this pilot action, a variety of different stakeholders exchange experiences on Public Engagement and ideate about the benefit of inclusive approaches in relation to contemporary challenges within the sector. While actors within the transport sector are often times seeking for technocratic top-down-solutions, the aim of the pilot is a change in the thinking of experts, leading to more openness in their approaches. This means that the participants are (potential) change-makers and actors experienced in participatory approaches. Experts will therefore get insights in why increased societal engagement is beneficial and on how to put these approaches into practice.||WP4||finished||x||x|
|SL10||Consensus conference||The pilot of the mobalance Consensus Conference aimed for a discussion in which different stakeholders bring in their perspectives in relation to the provided expert knowledge. This allowed for dynamic and diverging assessments of the implications this knowledge contained and enabled the participants to challenge the perspectives of the experts, showing that there are ‘realities’ beyond their lines of thinking and approaches. The event therefore contributed to Science Education/Science Literacy and Open Access, as it opened up the internal processes of scientific approaches for the participants and made the experts take into account considerations that were beyond the scope of their project. After SL workshop 2: The aim is to reach out with the results/idea - a final event will happen at the 11th of September, incporating citizen science approaches.||WP4||finished||x|
|SL10||Research goes to Street||This pilot action aims at realizing a citizen-led walking conversation in Madrid. The participating experts gain insights in the perspectives of citizens, while citizens are enabled to speak for themselves, rather than being represented. This opens up the possibility to reflect upon the societal embeddedness of scientific processes, while simultaneously identifying citizens’ needs and views. The pilot addresses Public Engagement and can diminish the gap between experts and society, both in terms of problem-perceptions and language. The focus of the pilot action is to strengthen civil societal actors, as this stakeholder group is usually either underrepresented or their input is reduced to users. After SL workshop 2: The aim is to either re-do the event a second time or to reverse the event: "Street goes to Research" - to invite citizens into the Technical University of Madrid. Due to scheduling issues, the event got postponed.||WP4||preparatory work started||x|
|SL10||GenVoice||The aim is to integrate unheard voices (future generations) into R&I processes. The PA is planned for October: Pupils in the city of Zilina will engage in experimenting with Urban Living Lab approaches at their school.||WP4||preparatory work started||x|
|SL10||Measuring and Visualizing Mobility||The aim is to measuer and visualize mobility (possibly related to individual CO2 output and the effects of the own mobility behaviour). This Pilot Action got canceled due to time issues of the Pilot Manger and the idea of collecting an merging data from different sources proving more difficult than initially anticipated for the time available to the participants.||WP4||finished||x|
|SL11||Public Innovation Compass (previously: Public Scientists Hero Challenge)||The Pilot Action concentrates on how environmentally focused Public Innovation Labs can best incorporate governance and public engagement in their research.|
To this end the NewHoRRIzon project hosts a Workshop at the World Resources Forum at Geneva (WRF, 22.-24 October 2019) for a consultation and co-design process with selected Public Innovation Labs. Bringing together researchers and practitioners of such labs as well as other relevant stakeholders the Workshop is designed to stimulate reflection on present (established) practices related to RRI dimensions and values in Public Innovation processes, to identify potential key benefits of RRI to Public Innovation and obstacles for implementation as well as ways to overcome them.
|WP4||not yet started||x||x|
|SL11||RRI must/need to have. Applicants SL5 <-> NCPs consultation awareness & training||The goal is to write a policy recommendation that aims at having public engagement as a fundamental part of research proposals (from “nice to have” to “must have”). We want to write a piece of text that defines the rationale and concrete provisions for public engagement in SC5 related topics in FP9. In order to gather information about the needs for public engagement, the idea is to create and conduct a survey in our Social Lab and the participants' networks asking them to communicate their view on the integration of public engagement with regards to good arguments for public engagement (in SC5 related topics). By collecting this information, we can gather valuable information about public engagement that we lack up to now. The resulting paper is to be written in a co-creating process whereby we integrate the input of all the institutions that participated in the survey, thereby giving the recommendation more weight.||WP4||in the midst of happening||x|
|SL11||Urban transition coalitions||The main idea is to bring together different civil society stakeholder groups in order to study interest formation, coalitions building and sustainability learning in a specific area of urban transformation conflicts. The Pilot action takes gardening in Berlin as an example bringing together, studying and working with urban garden activists and traditional urban gardeners about views and practices on gardening and its social and climate benefits for cities in a growing city. The research is intended to make the case for such Urban coalitions having the potential to foster successful transitions towards resilient cities - and how to integrate them into research & research funding processes.||WP4||preparatory work started||x|
|SL11||Value added transfer||The pilot group makes the case with good practice examples at hand that RRI is a clear advantage as far as the EC’s objectives of jobs and growth are concerned. RRI advocates on the policy level shall be provided with convincing facts and figures in order to grasp the interest or counter the arguments of those reluctant to consider participative and transdisciplinary research. Thus, the brochure “RRI – Impact through Participation” is in the making: While most texts are finished we are awaiting the last project example and then engage in a catchy design for the target group. Is is planned to provide the brochure in mid-February in order to have first reactions at hand to discuss at the second Social Lab Workshop.||WP4||in the midst of happening||x||x|
|SL11||Training on RRI||The idea is to provide training on RRI for consortium lead partners of EC research and innovation projects. The hope is that this training will be obligatory for all lead partners, at best being integrated in the official training day organized by the EC. This training should be the outcome of an accompanied multi-stakeholder process in order to identify barriers and chances for RRI and to develop advise on how to overcome these barriers and best take up chances. The Pilot Action therefore approached the new ENGAGE consortium proposing a multi-stakeholder process when applying for SC5 funding. Our idea has been integrated into the proposal and is now part of that project. The pilot workshop will take place in February 2020 in Vienna.||WP4||in the midst of happening||x||x|
|SL12||Solidarity for Europe||The pilot aimed at discussing the role of solidarity in addressing societal issues within the RRI framework. The background of RRI served as a basis to understand what measures that are beyond the given legal framework can be adopted to increase the general level of social justice. The workshop involved researchers and policy-makers from various disciplines discussing the idea of solidarity against the backdrop of responsible innovation. The side objective of this pilot was to raise awareness about RRI to researchers who are not explictly adopting such framework.||WP4||finished||X||X||X||X|
|SL12||RRI and “Changes to the Nature of Work”||Changes to the nature of work due to automation and data-driven technologies are a high policy priority for the European Union, Member-states and regional governments. While new technologies can create new jobs, many jobs are also vulnerable to automation and newly created ones will require combinations of digital and social skills that are in short supply. These changes also threaten to exacerbate regional disparity and inequality. How can stakeholders work together to ensure a just transition and implementation of data-driven technologies?
We will explore this question with stakeholders and key actors at the Brightlands Smart Services Campus in Heerlen. Invited participants will include: APG Netherlands, Statistics Netherlands, Accenture, Province Limburg, City of Heerlen, researchers from Maastricht University, KULeuven, RWTH Aachen University among others.
|WP4||preparatory work started||X||x||x||x||X|
|SL12||RRI Check-List||The pilot aims at helping research funding agencies and researchers to adopt RRI in their research projects. By providing a series of examples and brief explanation, the pilot hopes to spread the six keys forming RRI across Europe. One of the reasons to do this is that often RRI implementation suffers from a discrepancy between interpretations, paving the way to confusion and subsequent dismission. Furthermore, it is difficult to translate the six keys into the different research domains because some keys might be seen as not relevant or not applicable. Besides, funding agencies and actors helping researchers in their applications might not be expert of topics inherent to RRI. Therefore, a check-list might be a fruitful and agile tool to reflect on RRI aspects and integrate them into proposals, increasing their social and scientific relevance.||WP4||preparatory work started||X||x||x||x||x|
|SL13||Responsible AI framework and evaluation criteria for call for proposals||The pilot produced a responsibility framework and evaluation criteria for Council of Tampere Region’s European Regional Development Fund call for Responsible AI project proposals. The Pilot Action took place between October 2018 and January 2019. The Pilot Action developed a set of questions related to responsibility aspects of project proposals that were attached to the official project application template. In addition, an evaluation criteria was designed for this set of questions. The Responsible AI call was open for proposal up to fourth of March 2019.||WP4||finished||x||x||x||x|
|SL13||Capacity building of RRI in higher security education||“Capacity building of RRI in higher security education” targets to increase the knowledge and understanding of Responsible Research and Innovation by producing coherent course materials for undergraduate degree students in the field of security in Finland. Police University College of Finland, University of Jyväskylä, and Laurea University of Applied Sciences are the owners of the Pilot. The first phase of the Pilot Action, implemented within the Social Lab timeframe, is targeted to create and test on-line course materials for the needs of Police University College of Finland. The course material is made available for the students using Police University College’s Moodle on-line platform.||WP4||in the midst of happening||x||x||x|
|SL13||Extending CSR towards ethical and responsibility framework: Impact on society (Finnish Business Society)||Objective of the pilot is to integrate social responsibility and security related indicators to the organization’s measurement of societal impact. The target group of the pilot includes companies that are taking part to three half-day FIBS Focus Group sessions led by VTT. The Focus group sessions are targeted in finding tools for measuring the societal impact of companies and answering e.g. the following questions: what can be measured (qualitative and quantitative measurements), why it is important to measure, what is important to measure and how societal impact can be measured (qualitative and quantitative measurements).||WP4||finished||x||x||x||x||x|
|SL13||RRI application tool for SMEs especially working on AI||Pilot Action owned by YAGHMA company creates a toolkit for the development and promotion of RRI in AI SMEs, that could also be applied to other SME kinds too. The tool helps AI SMEs get a grip on the R&D, technical feasibility and commercial potential of their ground-breaking, innovative idea and develop it into a credible business reporting on the RRI. The tool is targeted to enable AI SMEs to measure their project performance against tailor-made RRI KPIs and monitor them over time. Going beyond regular communication to stakeholders, effective corporate reporting is key to building trust and aligning investment through transparency and accountability. In addition to informing external stakeholders – including investors – corporate RRI reporting is a powerful stimulus for internal conversation and decision-making with regard to contributing to the RRI at all levels within a company.||WP4||preparatory work started||x||x||x|
|SL14||Introducing RRI||This pilot action aims to introduce the RRI concept in organizations that are not aware about it and its possibilities. It also aims to diagnose the level of readiness of the organization and developing roadmaps for favoring its dissemination and provide an evaluation assessment about how successfully has been disseminated among peers and colleagues. This pilot has produced several activities of communication and dedicated events. Researchers based in Spain as well as NCPs from Greece have been involved on this one.||WP5||not yet started||X||X||X|
|SL14||Assessment of SRL for RRI||This second pilot action is oriented to develop tools that can be of help for obtaining feedback from the general public and adapting the concept of RRI to different target groups, for facilitating scientific communication and public engagement in Serbia. This pilot action will work from the development of the Societal Readiness Level tool that is planned in the New HoRRIzon project. This pilot action is being delivered in Novi-Sad University by the involved researchers in SL14.||WP5||in the midst of happening||X|
|SL14||Development of a European network for RRI support||The third pilot action identified in Madrid aims to prepare institutions to support the implementation of the RRI concept, increasing the level of awareness about the concept, delivering trainings, workshops and dedicated events, as well as generating linkages with RRI experts and conducting some kind of self-assessment about the concept in the host institution. The pilot is being carried out iby researchers in Bulgaria and Romania.||WP5||preparatory work started||X||X||X||X|
|SL14||Dialogue Skills||The last pilot action identifed in the first workshop aims to improve the level of dialogue skills of researchers for maximazing their communicative skills but also their relationships with other departments, clients, academics, citizens and society as a whole. This pilot stems from the imperious need that has been mapped out by the constant problems of communication that happen between many departments of universities. This work on the dialogue skills will pave the way for the RRI paradigm and the pilot driver is working on contacting experts on facilitation for getting supporters and allies in this endeavor. This pilot is being carried out by a researcher involved in the SL14 from the University of Novi-Sad.||WP5||preparatory work started||X||X||X||X||X|
|SL14||Human Sustainable Development||The first pilot action that was identified in the second workshop of SL14 aims to enrich and deepen the sustainability and social dimensions of the scientific and technological curricula that are being delivered in the Technical University of Cluj-Napoca (Romania). The pilot is looking for support of sustainability and SSH experts of the region to prepare a concept and a structured approach.||WP5||preparatory work started||X||X||X||X||x|
|SL14||RRI training 2.0||This pilot is a continuation of the first action that was identified and delivered after the first workshop in Madrid by one of the participants in the SL. It has generated a complete module on RRI for Widening applicants in Czech language by the Czech SEWP NCP. After the second workshop, this module is being translated into Spanish by the Spanish NCP and other participants are also considering working on this module for providing other translations. This work is embedded in the European network of National Contact Points of Widening, and have been backed up by other off-line trainings that have being delivered in the network of NCP´S of SEWP.||WP5||in the midst of happening||X||X||X|
|SL14||Chat with a researcher||Third pilot action identified in WS2 is oriented to push forward science picnics that happen in several eastern countries. This pilot action aims to provide offline (picnics) and online (twitter chats) public engagements with researchers for providing forums where people can make questions to scientists or learn something new about science, technology and innovation. The pilot is working on the attraction of researchers to this initiative at Ukraine by several participants of WS2 in SL14.||WP5||not yet started||X|
|SL14||Turning the tables (reverse science-café)||The last pilot action identified and that is being promoted after WS2 aims to connect the academia with the industry for increasing the presence of the former one in the networks of the latter one, and as a way for improving the collaborations between these two different worlds. The objective is to promote stable collaborations in Novi-Sad University for permeatting business ecosystem with scientific culture and science education. The pilot is being driven by participants in SL14 and other serbian researchers.||WP5||in the midst of happening||X||X||X||X||X|
|SL15||Interdisciplinary dialogues||One of the challenges of the current SwafS programme is that the interdisciplinary nature of the projects is something to be developed further. Participants of the SwafS social lab consider it to be an attractive element of future Europen framework programmes (and national programmes alike) to establish transversality as an important element, in particular to work on integrated views on responsibility between social scientists and humanists and scientists trained in natural sciences or technical disciplines. In the SwafS social lab we intended to make use of the NewHoRRIzon infrastructure and work together with other social labs to establish interdisciplinary dialogues, i.e. events facilitated by methods that help to build bridges and integrate views. We connected to the activities of social lab 19 for EURATOM, which is running the transversal "Nuclear Dating" event on 19-20 September 2019 in Brussels. Participants of our social lab will take part in the event and will report about their experiences and potential benefits. ||WP5||in the midst of happening||x||x||x||x|
|SL15||The future of science ? society||The questionmark between “science” and “society” in the title is meant to be programmatic, as with this pilot, we intend to organise a broader debate within the SwafS-/ RRI-community about the future of SwafS and RRI: Is it science for society, science in society, science with and for society? And where at all is society, if a programme like SwafS or a concept like RRI risk to become marginalized in the next European framework programme for research and innovation?|
This pilot has two elements: First, we support lobby activities for a new and advanced SwafS-like programme in the next framework programme, such as the Pathways Declaration and we call our networks to participate in the public consultation on Horizon Europe. Second, we will develop scenarios for alternative futures of (European) research funding to feed and illustrate debates about societally engaged research . Thus, we aim to demonstrate how the SwafS-community deals constructively with the promises and pitfalls of the SwafS programme and of the RRI concept. We believe that the context of the social lab and the NewHoRRIzon project is a good starting point for such a communication effort. Both activities are at the same time highly policy relevant and will therefore be pursued in close collaboration with the management board of NewHoRRIzon and other actors.
|WP5||in the midst of happening||x||x||x||x|
|SL15||RRI Education||SwafS has invested a lot in many different kinds of science education addressing different target groups starting at the age of teenagers. This pilot action addresses younger children at the age of kindergarten and primary education as well as teenagers. It has started at the time of the first workshop as an exchange of experts for science education of children and teenagers, who are working in very different formats and settings towards integrating RRI into science education, sometimes not explicit but rather building de-facto on RRI principles. There were several ideas in the room how to make this a fruitful exchange, among them to collect or develop tools, which can be used open source.|
The second workshop of the social lab took place at the premises of one of the pilot hosts, the Trnovo kindergarten in Ljubljana, and this gave momentum for a more focused discussion on how to share the knowledge and the good practice of this kindergarten as a pilot activity. A transfer-of-good-practice partnership between the Slovenian pilot host and a Spanish team has been established as a first concrete activity. The research group Fisabio in Valencia is coordinating the i-consent project, which aims to improve the information that patients receive from clinical studies. The cooperation in this pilot action is targeted especially at improving the guidelines for children.
|WP5||in the midst of happening||x||x||x|
|SL15||Sharing the benefits of RRI||This pilot action promotes the connection and exchange between ongoing SwafS projects and existing RRI knowledge hubs, such as SuperMORRI, RRI Tools, NewHoRRIzon, etc. Based on the indicator work by MORRI and SUPERMORRI, the pilot champions - and multipliers - jointly work on developing an easy-to-use template to share the benefits of RRI and demonstrate its usability by enriching it with their own fieldwork. By taking the results and products of an earlier RRI project as a basis for the pilot work, the pilot contributes to the development/emergence of good practice examples of recycled and adopted RRI work and results. |
Another central element and purpose of the pilot is to widely communicate the benefits of RRI to academic and non-academic audiences - beyond sectoral and disciplinary borders. As RRI is often perceived an abstract issue, working with illustrative, contextualized practical examples and insights from the champions' fieldwork presents a meaningful and effective way to deconstruct, concretize and more effectively communicate the benefits of RRI.
|WP5||in the midst of happening||x||x||x|
|SL16||"RRI show" gather RRI stories||The purpose of the pilot activity is to gather stories or examples from across the EIT, which address one or more aspects of RRI, and showcasing them online on the EIT website. It is concidered an awareness-raising tool to elevate RRI on the research agenda and to inspire potential new partners/projects to consider responsibility in new proposals or existing work.||WP5||preparatory work started||x|
|SL17||RRI and CAV||The initial three Pilot ideas of SL17 have been merged into one large Pilot Action that is conducted by several JRC staff members from different sites (mainly Ispra, Italy). The Pilot Action is tied with an ongoing JRC project on autonomous road transport and aims to add aspects of RRI. The Pilot includes research on public opinion (Eurobarometer Survey) and a literature review of expert narratives on autonomous vehicles. Engagement with different stakeholders is anticipated in workshops and focus groups including also members of the general public. These actions also include a critical reflection of narratives related to autonomous mobility and to highlight alternative solutions. A final workshop, anticipated for late 2019, will wrap-up and bring together the knowledge created.||WP5||in the midst of happening||x||x|
|SL18||RRI Lab||This pilot action is an RRI both to bring to conferences. It will be a forum for knowledge-sharing, awareness-raising, and public engagement activities around RRI. It will be a cooperation between NewHoRRIzon social lab participants and other RRI projects. So far, it has been present at OLLD19 and will also be at the Smart City Expo19.||WP5||preparatory work started||x||x||x||x|
|SL18||BINTELLIGENT||This Pilot Action has developed an interactive waste bin that can e.g. tell you how much resources has gone into producing your waste. This will promote the public understanding of waste management, sustainability, and encourages a change in waste production. This has been tested at Roskilde Festival in June 2019.||WP5||preparatory work started||x||x|
|SL19||Nuclear Dating||[design] Plan and organize 2 days long workshop that attract young researchers with counterparts of different disciplines (Nuclear &Social Sciences). [problem / objective] The objective is to overcome barriers for interdisciplinarity cooperation. “Nuclear Dating” will twin scientists from nuclear and non-nuclear disciplines with the purpose to mutually share their scientific approaches (“scientific dating”). This will support the mutual understanding of their different scientific approaches, stimulate critical thinking and contribute to lead to possibly better fulfil interdisciplinarity. [strategic considerations] The design is effective to foster exchange between different disciplines. It focuses on PhD students with the possibility to expand the concept on other levels.[normative considerations] This pilot stimulates several RRI keys, focusing on Science Education and Research ethics.||WP5||finished||x||x||x||x|
|SL19||Teach the teacher|
[design] The pilot will be based upon a two day residential course at the NCBJ facilities in Warsaw, inviting physics teachers. In this workshop, participants will learn about how to integrate responsibility and ethics to their classes. [problem / objective] From a Science education perspective this pilot provides the chance to overcome the linear thinking of physics being a subject without any relation to ethics and (societal) responsibility. [strategic considerations] The design is effective as it can be applied on different levels. NCBJ will also supervise the implementation of the workshop results.[normative considerations] This pilot will focus on Science Education, aiming to make RRI part of the physics classes.
[design] This pilot aims to integrate (traces of) RRI into
EURATOM by institutionalise it via receiving funding for a project [problem /
objective] In the previous Social Lab Workshops it was stressed that RRI cannot
be implemented to EURATOM without having the money and resources to do so [strategic
considerations] Doing so will enable the Social Lab team to generate impact
beyond the Social Lab itself by using the Consortiums Network to promote RRI in
EURATOM. Furthermore the other two EURATOM SL Pilots (Nuclear Dating and Teach the Teacher) will be integrated into the proposal. In case of success we would then have the opportunity to further refine these actions. [normative considerations] This pilot will enable the implementation of
RRI in EURATOM by providing sufficient funding for it. The proposal will be due
on September 25th , 2019.
|count by status|
|not yet started||5|
|preparatory work started||18|
|in the midst of happening||30|
- not every status has been filled!